Coaching the Complete Volleyball Player: Prioritizing Resilience and Mental Wellness

Author	Benjamin Slate Smith
Article Depth	Advanced / Expert
Required Knowledge	Advanced

The air in a competitive volleyball gym crackles with more than just the sharp reports of attacks hitting the floor or the squeak of shoes making rapid transitions. It is thick with ambition, expectation, and an unrelenting pressure that feels almost tangible. As coaches guiding athletes up the demanding ladder towards collegiate scholarships, national team consideration, and professional opportunities, we exist within this high-stakes environment daily. The drive for excellence is not merely a philosophical ideal; it’s the engine propelling our programs forward. This pressure emanates from multiple sources – passionate parents investing time and resources, administrators evaluating program success, dedicated fans living and dying with every point, recruiters scrutinizing potential additions to their rosters, teammates pushing each other towards shared goals, and undeniably, the intense internal standards athletes impose upon themselves. We, as coaches, are central figures in this dynamic, constantly seeking that fractional advantage, that subtle refinement in technique or strategy, that enhanced physical capacity which might translate into crucial points, momentum-shifting set victories, and ultimately, hard-earned match wins.

This relentless pursuit naturally guides us towards increasingly sophisticated methods for optimizing athlete potential. Modern, high-level programs recognize the value of a comprehensive support system, integrating specialists like sports psychologists equipped to hone mental toughness and performance consistency, and registered dietitians holding certifications as specialists in sports dietetics (RD, CSSDs) capable of crafting fueling strategies that meet the rigorous demands of our sport. We embrace the power of advanced analytics to dissect opponent tendencies and evaluate our own efficiencies, seeking patterns invisible to the naked eye. We implement cutting-edge strength and conditioning protocols meticulously designed by qualified professionals to augment critical physical attributes, whether it’s maximizing vertical jump height for dominant net play or enhancing the lateral quickness essential for defensive coverage. These elements represent the hallmarks of a committed, forward-thinking program dedicated to leaving no stone unturned in the quest for peak performance. However, this very drive for optimization, while commendable in its intent, can inadvertently lead us onto precarious ground, particularly when our focus narrows towards manipulating an athlete’s physical form. While leveraging the deep expertise of a well-coordinated multidisciplinary team offers undeniable benefits, the moment we step outside our clearly defined coaching competencies – especially concerning an athlete’s weight, their body composition, or their individual eating patterns – we engage in a practice fraught with significant, potentially devastating risks. It becomes seductively easy to perceive an athlete’s body as just another variable to be fine-tuned, another dial to twist in the complex equation of performance. Yet, making body shape or weight a target for commentary, intervention, or goal-setting initiates a perilous game, one where the profound potential for psychological scarring and physiological harm can dramatically outweigh, and often completely negate, any fleeting, superficial gains in athletic output.

Let’s confront an uncomfortable truth: volleyball, while lacking the explicit weight classes that define sports like wrestling or boxing, carries its own potent, often unspoken, set of aesthetic and physical pressures. A pervasive, culturally embedded narrative circulates within the sport – sometimes communicated subtly through imagery and implication, other times stated more overtly – suggesting that a specific body type, typically characterized by pronounced leanness and minimal body fat, represents the physical ideal for success. This narrative incorrectly forges a direct, causal link between a particular physique and highly desirable athletic qualities such as explosive jumping ability, extensive court coverage speed, and effortless agility. Observe high-level competition, browse the curated feeds of volleyball-focused social media platforms, or even listen attentively to the casual commentary exchanged among spectators, and this implicit bias often surfaces. This narrowly defined archetype can exert undue influence on perceptions of potential during tryouts, shape positional expectations (“liberos are supposed to be small and agile,” “middle blockers need that long, lean frame”), and subtly guide how athletes view themselves and each other. This prevailing misconception, however, represents a dangerous oversimplification rooted more firmly in tradition, aesthetic preference, and perhaps confirmation bias than in robust exercise physiology and biomechanics. It conveniently neglects the complex, multifaceted nature of what truly constitutes athletic success within the demanding context of volleyball.

The explosive power required for thunderous attacks and impenetrable blocks originates fundamentally from well-developed, efficiently recruited muscle mass, not simply from minimizing the percentage of body fat. Muscle is the engine of athletic movement. The structural resilience necessary to withstand the incredibly high volume of repetitive jumping and landing inherent in our sport – impacts that reverberate through joints and bones with every practice and match – demands strong skeletal structures and robust connective tissues. These very tissues are compromised by the chronic under-fueling often intrinsically linked to the relentless pursuit of extreme leanness, significantly increasing the risk of stress fractures and other overuse injuries, as documented extensively in research surrounding Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S). Furthermore, the cognitive elements crucial for high-level play – sharp, rapid decision-making under pressure, sustained focus during grueling long rallies or tense five-set battles, clear and effective communication orchestrating team defense or offense – all depend intrinsically on adequate energy availability to support optimal brain function. Chasing an arbitrary, aesthetically driven physical ideal, therefore, doesn’t just fail to guarantee performance enhancement; it can directly sabotage the very physiological systems and cognitive processes required to excel on the volleyball court. Performance is fueled, not starved.

This deeply flawed “leaner equals better” paradigm creates an environment ripe for the adoption of harmful coaching practices. Coaches, sometimes inadvertently acting as conduits for these broader cultural pressures or operating under outdated assumptions, might make seemingly innocuous, off-the-cuff remarks about an athlete’s appearance (“Looking trim!”), suggest vague directives like needing to “tone up” or “shed a few pounds” based on a subjective visual assessment and a presumed link to improved performance, or institute team-wide weigh-ins or body composition assessments (like skinfold measurements or bioelectrical impedance analysis) under the guise of objective monitoring. As compellingly argued in journalistic exposés and supported by a growing body of scientific literature, the fixation on such numerical metrics, particularly when divorced from a comprehensive, individualized understanding of an athlete’s overall health, training response, and performance trajectory, is demonstrably fraught with peril. While some proponents might rationalize these practices as tools for tracking training adaptations, guiding nutritional interventions, or even as a component of injury prevention strategies, the overwhelming evidence from sports science and psychology increasingly highlights the significant risks they entail.

Consistent research findings reveal that athletes subjected to frequent, mandatory weigh-ins or routine body composition testing exhibit significantly higher rates of body dissatisfaction, pervasive anxiety (often stemming directly from unfavorable comparisons with teammates or perceived judgment from coaching staff), an increased prevalence of disordered eating cognitions and behaviors, and a general preoccupation with weight that detrimentally detracts cognitive resources and focus away from crucial skill development, tactical understanding, and mental preparation for competition. The psychological burden imposed by these practices can be immense, transforming the training environment, which should be a space for growth and development, into a source of chronic stress, shame, and fear. This atmosphere can potentially trigger latent eating disorders or exacerbate existing body image struggles, conditions known to have serious medical and psychological consequences. The very act of measuring and emphasizing these numbers, regardless of intent, inadvertently shifts the athlete’s locus of control and focus away from performance mastery – improving their serve, perfecting their block timing, enhancing their defensive reads – towards the often unhealthy and counterproductive goal of body manipulation. As researchers like Sanford-Martens and colleagues have demonstrated, the nature of the coach-athlete relationship itself can significantly predict eating disorder risk among female collegiate athletes, underscoring the profound influence our actions and priorities have.

How, then, do we navigate this complex and challenging terrain? How can we maintain an unwavering commitment to fostering athletic excellence while simultaneously, and with equal dedication, championing the mental, emotional, and physical health of the young people entrusted to our guidance? The solution demands a conscious, deliberate, and often courageous shift in both perspective and daily practice, beginning with the absolute bedrock of any successful and healthy team environment: robust communication and deeply ingrained trust. We must actively and intentionally engineer a team culture where expressing vulnerability – acknowledging struggle, admitting uncertainty, asking for help – is not perceived as a sign of weakness but is instead recognized and celebrated as an act of courage and self-awareness. This necessitates carving out dedicated time and creating safe spaces for open, honest, and non-judgmental dialogue about the often-unspoken challenges inherent in the life of a dedicated student-athlete. Crucial topics such as managing performance anxiety before big matches, coping with academic stress and time demands, navigating the complex pressures related to body image often amplified by social media comparisons, dealing with confusion surrounding nutrition information and misinformation, and addressing broader mental health struggles like depression or anxiety should not be relegated to the shadows or treated as taboo. They need to be normalized, acknowledged as legitimate aspects of the high-performance athletic experience.

This commitment does not require coaches to function as unlicensed therapists; attempting to do so would be both unethical and potentially harmful, exceeding the boundaries of our professional training and scope of practice. Rather, it means cultivating an approachable demeanor, practicing empathetic listening without immediate judgment or unsolicited advice, and demonstrating genuine care for the athletes as individuals beyond their statistical contributions. It involves facilitating structured team discussions or workshops where athletes feel empowered to share their experiences, offer peer support, and learn coping strategies together. It might involve strategically bringing in qualified guest speakers, such as the team’s sports psychologist or sports dietitian, to lead educational sessions on topics like stress management, mindful eating, body acceptance, or mental skills training. Critically, it requires us, as coaches, to consistently model healthy coping mechanisms for dealing with pressure and setbacks ourselves, and to relentlessly communicate the core message that each athlete’s intrinsic worth is unconditional, entirely separate from their performance statistics on any given day, their playing time, or any measurement of their physical body. When athletes feel genuinely seen, heard, and valued as whole people, not just as athletic commodities, the foundation of trust deepens significantly, making them far more likely to proactively seek support from appropriate resources when facing challenges, rather than suffering in silence.

A fundamental cornerstone of this supportive, health-promoting approach is the humble recognition of the boundaries of our own expertise and the full-throated embrace of the immense power residing within a truly collaborative, well-functioning multidisciplinary support team. We are experts in volleyball – in teaching technique, devising game strategy, managing team dynamics, and fostering competitive spirit. We are not, however, registered dietitians professionally trained in medical nutrition therapy, licensed clinical psychologists equipped to diagnose and treat mental health disorders, or medical doctors qualified to make clinical health assessments. Attempting to operate within these specialized domains is not only a breach of professional ethics but carries the potential for inflicting tangible harm upon our athletes. Our crucial role within this framework is one of vigilant observation, empathetic concern, and effective facilitation – identifying potential red flags (unexplained performance declines, persistent fatigue, recurrent injuries, significant mood changes, observed shifts in eating habits), expressing concern privately and compassionately to the athlete, and seamlessly connecting them with the appropriate professional resources available within the athletic department or university system.

Promoting the regular utilization of team resources such as sports psychologists, academic advisors, mental health counselors, and sports dietitians should be embedded as standard operating procedure within the program’s culture, presented not as a crisis intervention measure but as a proactive tool for optimizing well-being and performance. These allied health professionals offer specialized, evidence-based tools and strategies that fall outside our coaching skillset: sports psychologists can teach concrete mental skills for managing competitive pressure, building sustainable confidence, enhancing focus and concentration, and navigating setbacks; sports dietitians can develop individualized, science-backed nutrition plans tailored specifically to the intense physiological demands of volleyball training and competition, educate athletes on effective fueling and recovery strategies to maximize adaptation and minimize injury risk, screen for disordered eating patterns and Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S), and importantly, debunk the pervasive harmful nutrition myths often propagated through social media or unqualified sources; athletic trainers and team physicians provide indispensable medical oversight, expert injury diagnosis and management, crucial health screenings, and informed decisions regarding return-to-play protocols.

Effective collaboration within this multidisciplinary team hinges upon establishing clear, mutually understood lines of communication (always meticulously respecting athlete confidentiality as mandated by regulations like HIPAA and FERPA) and a shared philosophy prioritizing holistic athlete welfare alongside performance outcomes. For instance, scheduling regular (e.g., weekly or bi-weekly) brief meetings involving the coaching staff, head athletic trainer, strength and conditioning coach, and sports dietitian can foster a unified message, prevent conflicting advice, and ensure that subtle signs of potential concern noticed by one professional (perhaps a sudden drop in weight room strength observed by the S&C coach, or persistent complaints of fatigue noted by the athletic trainer) are shared appropriately and considered within the broader context of the athlete’s health and training status, potentially prompting a more comprehensive assessment by the relevant specialist. Proactively integrating these professionals into the team’s daily fabric – having the dietitian present at some team meals, inviting the sports psychologist to observe practices occasionally, ensuring athletes know how and when to access athletic training services – normalizes seeking help and powerfully reinforces a program culture that genuinely values and actively supports holistic well-being as integral to athletic success.

Perhaps one of the most concrete, immediately impactful, and symbolically powerful changes a coaching staff can implement is to decisively and permanently step away from the bathroom scale and the body composition calipers. Allow me to state this with unambiguous clarity: coaches possess neither the need nor the appropriate qualifications to monitor, measure, or track athlete body weight or body fat percentage. Period. These specific measurements fall squarely and exclusively within the medical or clinical domain, to be utilized judiciously, if at all, by the team physician or certified athletic trainer for specific, clearly defined health-related purposes. Such purposes might include monitoring hydration status via carefully managed pre- and post-practice weigh-ins (where the immediate focus is solely on calculating fluid loss and guiding rehydration strategies, never on judging the weight itself), tracking necessary weight regain during recovery from a significant illness or injury under medical supervision, or potentially as one single data point among many within a comprehensive clinical screening protocol for Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S) conducted by qualified medical personnel. Even in these limited medical contexts, the resulting data is primarily intended for the clinician’s diagnostic assessment and monitoring, and the routine sharing of these specific numbers with the athlete themselves can often be counterproductive, potentially fostering unnecessary anxiety, obsessive tracking, and a harmful fixation on metrics that have limited direct correlation with on-court performance.

Our focus, as coaches dedicated to enhancing volleyball skill and competitive success, must remain unwaveringly fixed on observable, objective, performance-relevant metrics – the factors that actually dictate outcomes between the lines. This includes quantifiable improvements in jump touch height, faster approach times measured with timing gates, increased hitting efficiency percentages calculated from match statistics, better passing accuracy ratings based on objective criteria, reduced unforced error rates during drills and competition, consistent demonstration of high effort and intensity in practice sessions, effective and timely communication on the court, successful execution of tactical game plans, measurable strength and power gains documented in the weight room by the strength and conditioning professionals, and overall observations of athlete resilience, energy levels, and readiness during demanding training blocks and competitive schedules. The simple act of eliminating coach-led weigh-ins and body composition assessments immediately removes a significant source of psychological pressure and potential harm from the athletes’ experience. Simultaneously, it powerfully redirects everyone’s focus – coaches, athletes, and support staff alike – towards the multifaceted elements that truly determine success in volleyball: refined skill execution, strategic acumen, optimized physical conditioning specific to the sport’s demands, effective teamwork and communication, and robust mental fortitude.

This essential shift away from body metrics necessitates a parallel and equally critical transformation in the language we employ daily, demanding heightened awareness and deliberate intention regarding the profound power of our words, especially when they touch upon athletes’ physical appearance or bodies. Even comments intended to be complimentary, such as, “Wow, you look really lean and fit!” or “Looks like you lost some weight, that’s great!” can inflict surprising damage. Such remarks implicitly forge a link between the coach’s approval, perceived athletic readiness, or potential for improvement, and the athlete’s body size or shape. This reinforces the pernicious and inaccurate idea that an athlete’s value, status, or even playing time fluctuates in direct proportion to their physical appearance. Athletes internalize these messages rapidly, potentially coming to believe that their acceptance within the team or their standing with the coach is contingent upon maintaining a certain aesthetic, which can tragically lead them down a dangerous path of restrictive eating behaviors, excessive exercise, or other unhealthy compensatory measures solely to gain or retain that perceived approval. The conspicuous absence of such body-focused comments, particularly if commentary on appearance was previously normalized within the program, can also be misinterpreted by athletes if not accompanied by a clear shift towards performance-focused feedback.

Instead, we must consciously and consistently redirect our feedback, praise, and constructive criticism towards dimensions entirely within the athlete’s control and directly relevant to their development as volleyball players: their demonstrated effort, the quality of their skill execution, their decision-making processes on the court, their resilience in bouncing back from errors, their contributions to positive team dynamics, their attitude and coachability, their measurable improvements over time, and their displays of sportsmanship. Specificity is key here. Rather than a generic “good job,” offer targeted feedback: “Your transition footwork from blocking to hitting was significantly quicker on that last sequence, allowing you to get into perfect position for a powerful attack.” “I really appreciate how consistently you communicate the block setup and opponent tendencies to your pin hitters before each serve.” “That was a tremendous hustle play to keep that ball alive during the long rally – that kind of relentless effort lifts the entire team’s energy.” “You demonstrated real mental toughness by immediately refocusing and executing a perfect serve right after that tough hitting error.” By relentlessly focusing our verbal and non-verbal communication on what athletes do – their acquired skills, their expended effort, their tactical choices, their collaborative actions – rather than on how they look, we affirm their value based on their actions, contributions, and character. This fosters intrinsic motivation, builds performance-based confidence, cultivates a healthier self-concept independent of physical appearance, and ultimately strengthens the coach-athlete relationship built on mutual respect and shared performance goals.

Our communication surrounding nutrition requires an equally drastic and deliberate overhaul, purging our coaching vocabulary of any moralizing or judgmental terms related to food. Food is fuel; it is nourishment; it is culturally significant; it is often social. It is not inherently “good” or “bad,” “clean” or “junk,” “healthy” or “unhealthy” when viewed in isolation from the overall dietary pattern and context. Athletes are not “cheating” on a diet or being “disciplined” or “undisciplined” based solely on their food choices. This pervasive black-and-white, dichotomous thinking about food creates a psychological minefield laden with guilt, anxiety, shame, and often, a deeply dysfunctional relationship with eating that can manifest in various harmful ways. These may include rigid dietary restriction leading to under-fueling, cycles of deprivation followed by compensatory bingeing, or an obsessive preoccupation with adhering to arbitrary food rules, sometimes bordering on orthorexia nervosa, an unhealthy obsession with “righteous” eating. Instead of perpetuating these harmful constructs, we must consciously adopt and consistently utilize neutral, function-focused language when discussing nutrition within the team context.

Frame conversations around fueling for performance: emphasizing carbohydrates (found abundantly in grains, fruits, starchy vegetables, dairy) as the body’s primary and most efficient energy source for the explosive movements, repetitive jumping, and sustained high-intensity play characteristic of volleyball; highlighting protein (from sources like lean meats, poultry, fish, eggs, dairy, legumes, tofu) as essential for muscle repair, recovery, and adaptation following strenuous practices and strength training sessions; explaining the role of dietary fats (found in oils, nuts, seeds, avocados, fatty fish) in supporting overall health, hormone production, and the absorption of fat-soluble vitamins; and discussing the importance of micronutrients (vitamins and minerals from a wide variety of foods) which participate in countless physiological processes vital for energy metabolism, immune function, bone health, and overall recovery and well-being. Discuss the practical application of nutrient timing: the strategic importance of consuming carbohydrate-rich pre-training snacks or meals to ensure adequate energy availability for optimal performance during practice or competition; the potential benefits of intra-match fueling (e.g., sports drinks, easily digestible carbohydrates) for maintaining intensity during long matches or tournaments; and the critical window for post-training recovery nutrition, emphasizing the timely intake of both carbohydrates (to replenish depleted muscle glycogen stores) and protein (to facilitate muscle protein synthesis and repair) to maximize adaptation and prepare for the next training bout.

Promote the fundamental principles of a healthy dietary pattern: balance (consuming appropriate amounts from all food groups), variety (eating a wide range of different foods to ensure intake of diverse nutrients), adequacy (consuming sufficient overall energy and nutrients to meet individual needs), and importantly, flexibility (allowing for enjoyment of all foods in moderation without guilt, recognizing that social and cultural aspects of eating are also important for well-being). Encourage athletes to develop a positive relationship with food, empowering them to listen to their internal hunger and fullness cues and to enjoy a varied diet that supports not only their demanding physical requirements but also their cultural backgrounds and social enjoyment of eating. The most effective and ethically sound approach here involves close collaboration with a qualified sports dietitian (RD, CSSD). This professional can provide evidence-based, sport-specific nutrition education tailored precisely to your team’s training volume, intensity, and competition schedule, empowering athletes with accurate knowledge and practical strategies rather than instilling fear, imposing rigid, unsustainable dietary rules, or promoting fad diets. Team meals, when provided, should be viewed as valuable opportunities for connection, camaraderie, and convenient refueling, never as occasions for dietary surveillance, judgment, or critical commentary from coaching staff. Making appropriate recovery snacks readily available immediately following practices or strength sessions – items like chocolate milk, fruit, yogurt, granola bars, trail mix, or tart cherry juice – sends a powerful, tangible message about the program’s commitment to prioritizing and facilitating effective recovery fueling as an integral part of the training process.

It is absolutely imperative, demanding unwavering vigilance from the entire coaching staff, that we never, under any circumstances, promote, suggest, condone, or turn a blind eye to compensatory behaviors related to food intake or exercise. The insidious notion that athletes must somehow “earn” their food through exceptional on-court performance, that they need to restrict their caloric intake following the consumption of a subjectively perceived “unhealthy” meal or treat, or that they should perform extra conditioning sessions specifically to “burn off” calories consumed is profoundly toxic and serves as a direct gateway to the development of diagnosable disordered eating patterns and an unhealthy, often compulsive, relationship with exercise. This mindset fosters a punitive, dysfunctional relationship with both food (viewed as something to be feared or controlled) and movement (viewed as punishment or a means of caloric compensation, rather than a joyful expression of athleticism or a tool for performance enhancement). We must consistently and clearly reinforce the fundamental biological reality: adequate and consistent energy intake is a non-negotiable physiological requirement for maintaining basic health, facilitating recovery from training stress, promoting positive adaptation to the training stimulus (getting stronger, faster, more powerful), and possessing the capacity to perform skills consistently at a high level during demanding practices and competitions. Sufficient energy is always required and always deserved, entirely irrespective of match outcomes, individual practice performance levels, perceived dietary transgressions, or body weight fluctuations. Directly linking food intake or prescribed exercise volume to punishment for mistakes or reward for success creates deeply ingrained, dangerous psychological associations that can have long-lasting negative consequences. While holding athletes accountable for their effort, focus, and execution is an inherent part of the coaching process, this accountability must never involve manipulating an athlete’s fundamental nutritional needs or weaponizing exercise as a form of punishment in a way that fosters a negative, potentially harmful relationship with physical activity itself.

A particularly critical, yet frequently overlooked or misunderstood, area of athlete health, possessing heightened relevance in female-predominant sports such as volleyball, concerns menstrual function. The pervasive “no pain, no gain” ethos, often misinterpreted or applied inappropriately, combined with the dangerous and physiologically inaccurate myth that the loss of regular menstrual periods (amenorrhea) is simply a normal or even desirable sign of intense training and peak fitness in female athletes, needs to be actively and systematically dismantled through education and open dialogue. This belief represents a fundamental misunderstanding of female physiology. A regular, consistent menstrual cycle serves as a vital sign, a key external indicator of underlying hormonal health and, critically, sufficient energy balance in female athletes of reproductive age. Its absence, or significant irregularity, is not a badge of honor signifying elite training; rather, it is frequently a primary and readily observable symptom of Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S). This syndrome, formally recognized by the International Olympic Committee and detailed in consensus statements (like the one updated by Mountjoy and colleagues in 2018), results from a chronic mismatch between an athlete’s energy intake and the total energy expended to support not only their sport participation but also essential life processes, growth and development (particularly in adolescent and young adult athletes), and activities of daily living.

It is crucial to understand that RED-S is not merely an issue confined to menstrual function; it represents a complex, systemic physiological dysfunction with potentially severe and far-reaching consequences impacting multiple body systems. Chronically low energy availability can significantly impair metabolic rate (making weight management more difficult), compromise bone health by disrupting the normal bone remodeling process (leading to reduced bone mineral density and substantially increasing the risk of stress fractures – injuries particularly common and debilitating for volleyball players due to the high-impact nature of repetitive jumping and landing), suppress immune function (increasing susceptibility to illness), negatively affect cardiovascular health, impair protein synthesis (hindering muscle repair, recovery, and growth), and detrimentally influence mood, concentration, coordination, and overall psychological well-being. Crucially, from a coaching perspective, RED-S unequivocally impacts athletic performance negatively. Athletes experiencing RED-S often exhibit decreased endurance capacity, reduced muscle strength and power output, an elevated risk of various injuries (not just stress fractures), impaired judgment and decision-making abilities on the court, and a diminished responsiveness to training stimuli (meaning they don’t adapt as well to the training they are doing). It is also vital to recognize that RED-S affects male athletes as well, although the signs and symptoms manifest differently due to hormonal distinctions (e.g., reduced testosterone levels, low libido, potential decrements in bone health, persistent fatigue, mood disturbances). Research by Torstveit and colleagues has specifically highlighted concerning associations between exercise dependence, eating disorder symptoms, and biomarkers of RED-S among male endurance athletes, underscoring that this is not solely a female issue.

Coaches bear a significant responsibility to proactively educate themselves and their athletes (in an age-appropriate manner) about the realities of RED-S, including its causes, signs, symptoms, and serious health and performance consequences. This involves actively normalizing conversations about menstrual health among female athletes and discussing broader indicators like persistent fatigue, inadequate recovery, frequent illness, or recurrent injuries among all athletes. We must strive to cultivate an environment of trust and psychological safety where any athlete feels comfortable and secure disclosing menstrual irregularities, unusual levels of fatigue, or other potential RED-S symptoms to a coach or athletic trainer without fear of judgment, dismissal, or being perceived as weak, lacking commitment, or trying to avoid training. Our defined role in this situation is not diagnostic but supportive and directive: to listen empathetically, express appropriate concern, and strongly encourage the athlete to seek a confidential medical evaluation from the designated team physician or their primary care provider. We must consistently reinforce the message that addressing these potential health issues is absolutely crucial for both their immediate performance potential and their long-term health and athletic longevity. Prioritizing health is not separate from prioritizing performance; it is foundational to it.

This comprehensive, athlete-centered approach ultimately coalesces around a simple yet profound guiding principle: we must coach the whole athlete. It requires recognizing that the individuals comprising our team roster are far more than just their designated positions – setters, outside hitters, middle blockers, liberos, or defensive specialists. They are complex young people simultaneously navigating the intense pressures of academic coursework, evolving social dynamics within and outside the team, personal life challenges and transitions, and the formidable physical and mental demands inherent in participating in elite-level collegiate or high-performance club volleyball. Our coaching philosophy must embrace working with them, striving to understand their unique individual needs, recognizing their diverse strengths, acknowledging their vulnerabilities, and supporting their holistic development. It’s particularly important to remember that physical maturation, especially during the high school and collegiate years, naturally involves fluctuations and changes in body composition and weight as part of normal growth and development; these biological processes should be understood, supported, and accommodated within training and nutrition planning, never viewed as problems to be aggressively “fixed” or manipulated through restrictive dieting practices or punitive exercise regimens.

Recall always that peak performance in a complex, dynamic sport like volleyball emerges not from a single input but from a sophisticated synergy of multiple interconnected factors. These include the meticulous refinement of sport-specific technical skills through countless hours of deliberate practice, the development of tactical intelligence and game awareness, the optimization of physical conditioning encompassing strength, explosive power, agility, speed, and sport-specific endurance, the implementation of effective recovery strategies (including prioritizing adequate sleep duration and quality – a vastly underrated yet critical performance enhancer), the cultivation of robust mental health characterized by confidence, focus, emotional regulation, and resilience, the adherence to smart hydration practices to maintain physiological function, and crucially, the provision of consistent and sufficient fueling through well-planned nutrition to support all of these processes. Over-indexing on body weight or body composition, treating it as the singular magic key to unlocking athletic potential, represents a simplistic, reductionist, and potentially devastating miscalculation that ignores the intricate interplay of these other vital components. Instead, we must adopt and consistently apply a holistic lens to our coaching. This involves carefully monitoring training load and athlete response, paying close attention to subtle signs of excessive fatigue, burnout, or under-recovery, making it a point to inquire about sleep quality and perceived stress levels, actively fostering strong, supportive intra-team relationships and positive group dynamics, and intentionally creating an overarching program environment where athletes feel genuinely supported, respected, and valued in every facet of their lives, both on and off the court.

The culture we deliberately cultivate within the confines of our program possesses an influence that reverberates far beyond the gymnasium walls, impacting athletes’ attitudes, behaviors, and overall well-being in profound ways. As compellingly demonstrated by research such as the study conducted by Scott, Haycraft, and Plateau (referenced in the original prompt), examining teammate influences, it is clear that peer relationships and group norms within a team are powerful drivers of athletes’ attitudes and behaviors concerning eating habits, body image perceptions, and exercise patterns. This finding highlights the critical leverage point we possess as coaches: we effectively set the cultural thermostat for the entire team environment. Our actions, our words, our stated priorities, the behaviors we model, the standards we enforce, the values we implicitly and explicitly endorse – all these elements send powerful ripples throughout the group, shaping collective norms, influencing individual choices, and establishing expectations for interaction and behavior.

When we, as leaders, consistently model respect for all individuals, demonstrate empathy in our interactions, maintain a primary focus on the process of development and improvement rather than solely on competitive outcomes (while still upholding high standards and striving for excellence), celebrate effort, resilience, collaboration, and sportsmanship with the same fervor as individual statistical achievements or victories, and unequivocally prioritize the long-term health and holistic well-being of our athletes alongside their performance goals, we lay the essential groundwork for a positive, psychologically safe, and nurturing environment. Such a carefully constructed culture naturally fosters deeper trust between coaches and athletes, enhances open and honest communication, builds stronger team cohesion and mutual support, demonstrably reduces performance-related anxiety, and ultimately, allows athletes to unlock their full potential more consistently and sustainably precisely because they feel fundamentally secure, genuinely respected, and comprehensively supported as whole people.

This approach is not about adopting a “soft” coaching style or lowering expectations; rather, it is about employing a smarter, more informed, and ultimately more effective coaching strategy grounded in principles of human development, motivation, and well-being. It represents a clear recognition that athletes who feel psychologically safe, physically healthy, emotionally supported, and intrinsically valued are far more likely to be receptive to coaching, resilient in the face of adversity, willing to take risks necessary for growth, and capable of performing closer to their peak potential, especially when subjected to the intense pressures of high-stakes competition. Moreover, the invaluable lessons learned within such a positive and demanding environment – lessons encompassing self-care practices, healthy coping strategies for managing stress, the cultivation of a positive body image, effective interpersonal communication skills, the value of teamwork and mutual accountability – represent essential life skills that transcend the boundaries of sport. These capabilities equip our athletes for sustained success, health, and well-being long after their competitive volleyball careers conclude. Shaping this environment and fostering this holistic development is perhaps the most profound responsibility inherent in our role, demanding our continuous commitment to learning, rigorous self-reflection, adaptability, and an unwavering dedication to nurturing the immense human potential entrusted to our care. This, ultimately, constitutes the enduring legacy of truly impactful coaching – building not just winning teams, but resilient, capable, and flourishing individuals.

Bibliography

Ackerman, K. E., Holtzman, B., Cooper, K. M., Flynn, E. F., Bruinvels, G., Tenforde, A. S., … & Constantini, N. W. (2019). Low energy availability surrogates correlate with health and performance consequences of Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 53(10), 628-633. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098958 [https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-098958]

Burke, L. M., Lundy, B., Fahrenholtz, I. L., & Melin, A. K. (2018). Pitfalls of Conducting and Interpreting Estimates of Energy Availability in Free-Living Athletes. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, 28(4), 350-363. doi: 10.1123/ijsnem.2018-0007 [https://doi.org/10.1123/ijsnem.2018-0007]

Dipla, K., Kraemer, R. R., Constantini, N. W., & Hackney, A. C. (2021). Relative energy deficiency in sport (RED-S): Elucidation of endocrine changes affecting the health of males and females. Hormones (Athens), 20(2), 197-209. doi: 10.1007/s42000-020-00249-0 [https://doi.org/10.1007/s42000-020-00249-0]

Joy, E., Kussman, A., & Nattiv, A. (2016). 2016 update on eating disorders in athletes: A comprehensive narrative review with a focus on clinical assessment and management. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 50(3), 154-162. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-095735 [https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2015-095735]

Krentz, E. M., & Warschburger, P. (2013). Sports-related correlates of disordered eating in adolescent female athletes. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 16(3), 201-206. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2012.07.005 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2012.07.005]

Logue, D. M., Madigan, S. M., Melin, A., Delahunt, E., Heinen, M., Donnell, S. M., & Corish, C. A. (2020). Low Energy Availability in Team Sport Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Medicine, 50(12), 2251-2273. doi: 10.1007/s40279-020-01362-8 [https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-020-01362-8]

Martinsen, M., Bratland-Sanda, S., Eriksson, A. K., & Sundgot-Borgen, J. K. (2010). Dieting to win or to be thin? A study of dieting and disordered eating among adolescent elite athletes and non-athlete controls. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 44(1), 70-76. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2009.068669 [https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2009.068669]

Mountjoy, M., Sundgot-Borgen, J. K., Burke, L. M., Ackerman, K. E., Blauwet, C., Constantini, N., … & Budgett, R. (2018). IOC consensus statement on relative energy deficiency in sport (RED-S): 2018 update. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 52(11), 687-697. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099193 [https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-099193]

NCAA Sport Science Institute. (n.d.). Eating Disorders. [https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2016/8/15/eating-disorders.aspx]

NCAA Sport Science Institute. (n.d.). Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport (RED-S). [https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/2/10/relative-energy-deficiency-in-sport-red-s.aspx]

Petrie, T. A., & Greenleaf, C. A. (2012). Body image and athleticism. In T. F. Cash (Ed.), Encyclopedia of body image and human appearance (Vol. 1, pp. 142-148). Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-384925-0.00022-8 [https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384925-0.00022-8]

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 [https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68]

Sanford-Martens, T. C., Davidson, M. M., Franks, H. M., & Martens, M. P. (2020). The coach-athlete relationship in the prediction of eating disorder risk among female collegiate athletes. Eating Disorders, 28(4), 481-495. doi: 10.1080/10640266.2019.1645231 [https://doi.org/10.1080/10640266.2019.1645231]

Scott, C. L., Haycraft, E., & Plateau, C. R. (2019). Teammate influences and relationship quality are associated with eating and exercise psychopathology in athletes. Appetite, 143, 104404. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.104404 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104404]

Smoll, F. L., & Smith, R. E. (2006). Enhancing coach-athlete relationships: Cognitive-behavioral principles and procedures. In J. Dosil (Ed.), The sport psychologist’s handbook: A guide for sport-specific performance enhancement (pp. 19-37). John Wiley & Sons Ltd. [https://www.wiley.com/en-us/The+Sport+Psychologist%27s+Handbook%3A+A+Guide+for+Sport+Specific+Performance+Enhancement-p-9780470863598]

Thomas, D. T., Erdman, K. A., & Burke, L. M. (2016). Nutrition and athletic performance. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 48(3), 543-568. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000852 [https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000852]

Thompson, R. A., & Sherman, R. T. (2014). Reflections on athletes and eating disorders. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 15(6), 678-683. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.06.002 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.06.002]

Torstveit, M. K., Fahrenholtz, I. L., Lichtenstein, M. B., Stenqvist, T. B., & Melin, A. K. (2019). Exercise dependence, eating disorder symptoms and biomarkers of Relative Energy Deficiency in Sports (RED-S) among male endurance athletes. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, 5(1), e000439. doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000439 [https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000439]